T Nation

Do not Post Names of Reliable Sources

For all of those out there who feel compelled to post the names of companies who are reliable sources for Finiplix, use your head.
It was trial and error for all of us to find a reliable source and when we did we shut our mouth and did not post specific web sites. There were more than enough tips from Brock and Bill and the rest of us that you could have figured it out without disclosing the specific site. Do you think that once that information is posted that you will be able to use that source for much longer? And please people who review these post at T-Mag, do not let others post the names of sources on this forum.

Thank You

Oh please! listing the sources of Finaplix will not put them in jeaporady. Remember this is legally sold. It is the consumer’s responsibility to use this in a legal manner. For example, say I buy a legal product such as a gun from Walmart and then shoot someone. It’s me that will be going to jail. Walmart, as long as they followed the law, cannot be shutdown. Unless a buyer informs one of these companies that he is going to use the fina as a steroid and then proceeds to sell that person the fina, the company is not liable for the buyers activity once they have the product. buh-bye!

To begin, I feel the same was as you do iguanascorpio. As an avid bodybuilder, we are often shunned from several circles because people feel we have this “hardcore” mentality which affords for muscles only and no brain. Because of this, the FDA and other government organizations have given us very little leeway to go about our business as we se fit, due to our “mindless, muscle-filled heads.” So, when we all find a site on the internet or some other source for a FDA-outlawed substance (that usually has no reason to be banned), it is a much sought after prize…one which should be kept as secret as possible. However…several of us use one of only a few large search engines to find these sites, and we all often use the same search word(s) to gain access to these sites. Are we all to think that the FDA is not smart enough do do this as well? Take Finaplix for example. We go to Yahoo, or Alta Vista or somethin like that and type in “Finaplix” (oh god, there goes our HUGE secret). We then go through every site tryin to find help from a kind soul (or a blind computer). Now I don’t mean to upset anyone who thinks they are absolutely special in this endeavor, but we all type in the same keyword, and we all get the list of the same sites. If the FDA typed in “Finaplix,” they would get the same list that you and I do. They would be at perfect liberty to go through the same process to find those sites that we arduously attempt to find. Therefore, though some may make it EASIER for the FDA to go out and find these websites, please do keep in mind that its nothing the FDA couldn’t do in a matter of 1 hour. So, while I am upset that there are those who just give away the full out adress of sources instead of giving us some clues as to what to search for, I can’t get too upset because when all is said and done…IT’S NOT A BIG SECRET.

I don’t think that it would of really occured to too many people, even the FDA, that anyone would be using Fini on themselves. So it wouldn’t of brought much attention. I think that the main point is that it really is pretty easy to find a source. Why bring unnecessary attention to the few places that have it available? The knuckleheads who can’t find it can just look a little bit more. I think at this rate all of the sources will be required that purchases come with some sort of proof for it’s use.

Fed,

It’s not the company that will be placed in jeapordy, it is our ability to get the product with “no questions asked”.

How is Naming their website going to change their no questions asked policy? I am under the impression that they are not required by law to demand any sort of proof of cattle ownership. I am also under the impression that companys that do demand this proof, do so voluntarily. Besides, I can guarantee you that the feds are well aware of which distributors roidfreaks like to frequent.

The FDA has nothing to do with agricultural growth implants nor does it have anything to do with removal and prosecution of controlled substances. Since this is the case, how is that we can have confidence in your remarks below… please please please don’t post something which can be misleading unless you have all the facts.

Hi guys, I have to agree with iguanascorpio.

No, the FDA won’t be the controlling body that puts the clamp on. It will be the DEA. And they will look initially for an ‘air of impropriety’ to begin their investigation. The DEA has enormous discretionary powers (practically a carte blanche) to control the traffic and production of illicit substances in this country. If they wish, they can shut down operations at a legitimate business where their investigation is taking place until they are ready to prosecute. How long can that take? As long as they want, long enough to bankrupt everyone involved and put them out of business, without even the slightest nod at due process.

L is right; the DEA does not control the sale of veterinary pharmaceuticals per se in this country, as long as they are sold for veterinary use. But please, don’t try to convince anybody with that lame argument that you are using this stuff for “animal use”, unless you have incontrovertable proof that a human being is some hybrid species of cow. You can’t legally use veterinary drugs for anything other than the uses indicated on the label. If you make something for human consumption out of them, you are breaking the law, the person who sold it to you is breaking the law, the people who told you how to do it are breaking the law, and the manufacturer may be breaking the law. The legal concept of due diligence will be one of the principle arguments used to bring everyone down. Thanks to a “lapse of due diligence” and other things, every one of you can get sent to jail, or at the very least hassled into bankruptcy and ruin if you are implicated.

The FDA is small and underfunded, whereas the DEA is a big outfit with lots of man-power and cash. Don’t think for a minute that the DEA isn’t checking this site often, hoping that someone here doesn’t have yet another lapse of judgement that will lead to some kind of ‘investigation’. And it’s not only the government we have to worry about. Do you all remember that post from Brock about the angry mother that threatened to sue him and T-mag because her son called him for advice, lied to him about his age and got sick (or had an explosion, I forget which) from making 'roids in his kitchen? It’s irrelevant that the kid lied about his age, because Mom could easily show a lack of due diligience on the part of the corporation for not checking it out adequately. That’s all it would take to put T-mag out of business and send the principals to jail.

Discretion is the better part of valor, guys. If you try to use another lame argument to refute these ideas, then you really don’t understand how vulnerable you are to arrest and prosecution. I would like to be reading T-mag for years to come, but I don’t think that’s going to happen if some of us insist on behaving like fools.

Just for clarification, Greg, T-mag does not provide one on one steroid consultations. Some of our writers have acted as consultants in the past, however, on their own time. So, I’m not sure T-mag could get in trouble for Brock doing a consult on his own time, no more than Wal-Mart could get in trouble if Bert, the guy who sweeps up, sells some pot on his own time.

I’m no expert on this issue, but I’m sure the first amendment comes into this somewhere.

As for fina, the T-mag board does not allow readers to post any specific addresses or sites when it comes to steroids and the like. We do this mainly to prevent being spammed by dealers and scammers. Other boards are filled with sites, e-mail addresses, names, locations etc. If the FDA or DEA wanted to keep their eyes on a specific site, I think this board would be pretty far down on the list. I may be wrong, but I’m guessing law enforcement is more interested in heroin and meth than they are in guys wanting to add a few pounds of muscle. Therefore, unless you’re a big time dealer, then I think busting the average twice-a-year juicer is also low down on the “to do” list of The Man. I’ve also never heard of anyone actually being busted for using fina. Has anyone?

Interesting discussion.

I totally agree with the comments. If you are ignorant enough to post names, sites, etc you are probably a young, stupid kid who shouldnt even be messing with any kind of drug in the first place. It is hard enough to obtain legitimate supplements at a fair price without some kid wrecking it for everybody. Besides most young kids dont have the right attitude or diet to try to be a serious lifter. Lets keep it to the mature people.

Yes, Bowd, smashing idea. Leave serious lifting and supplementation to the mature people…you know, the ones who aren’t prejudiced and that don’t go onto serious question forums and begin belligerantly classifying huge groups of people as ignorant simply and solely based on age. Oh by the way, to go along with that all young stupid ignorant kids can’t be real bodybuilders thing…old farts can’t be serious lifters either because they are too old and stuck in their ways to ever be able to adapt to the ever-changing world of bodybuilding. Sounds pretty stupid huh? Well, thats pretty much the BS that you just tried to feed all of us by saying that we are all too young and stupid to be serious about this great sport and lifestyle.

Time out guys. Read what Chris wrote again. If any of you are “hard core” lifters then you know that this site is the MOST tame site around. Go to some of the other hard core sites and you can get ALL the juice info you want, including guys posting lists of steroids for sale. Anybody who thinks the fed is sitting somewhere and watching any of these posts is nuts. Any way, T-Mag has monitors checking our posts. Anything questionable gets tossed. T-Mag is not going to open themselves up to any unnecessary scrutiny by posting something that would open eyes. As I said, go see the other sites and your eyes will be opened.

Sorry for naming a source on the board. To be honest, I really didn’t and still don’t think my question and response contained particularly damaging information since the “source” is an established on-line business and not the type of black market “source” alluded to on other boards. In this case, discretion seemed to be less necessary since the company mentioned is well advertised on the net. Furthermore, I discovered the source via a routine search under finaplix, it’s listed several times. All I originally asked was about the legality of ordering finaplix on-line. I did not intend to mention any supplier by name until another reader asked.

Anyway, I guess I deserved some of the flaming, but I think it is naive to assume that the authorities are clueless about this subject. Rather, the product is legal to purchase and unless there is some overt indication of widespread impropriety I doubt that they will suddenly develop an interest. In closing, I am not some dumb kid, even though I admit, arguendo, that I may have acted imprudently in my post. I am actually a 41 y.o. guy with considerable lifting experience, including experience with AAS, though none with the substance in question. Again, sorry for the problems caused by the post. It won’t happen again. The last thing I want to do is alienate my fellow lifting brothers or jeopardize our access to what appears to be a quality product.

To Kiddo and any other youths who may have mis-interpreted my statements. I did not intend that to be degrading to all younger people who train hard day in and day out in this sport. To those people I apologize and meant no disrespect. I was merely pointing out a true fact that a young ‘first timer’ who gets ahold of some stuff be it juice, weed or booze would be more likely to run their mouth than a mature person. Notice I said ‘MATURE’… not older. An immature person could be of any age. I am all for sharing of info and knowledge, but not at the expense of ruining a good thing. Sorry if you took personal offense, but if there are people out there who agree with me, do say so.

To Bowd, I understood what you said in your post and found nothing wrong with it. I totally agree with you as for maturity. As for the others who don’t beleive this site is monitored by the DEA, Why take any chances?If it is (and we wouldn’t know it until it is too late)why would we want to ruin anything for anyone else?I would never give any info about any suppliers over the internet.When a good thing is found keep it to yourself,it won’t be long before others find the same thing on their own.

Hi Chris, thanks for responding to my post. You are technically right about Wal-Mart and Bob the pot dealer, except for one thing. Bob’s pot dealing won’t be the issue that gets Wal-Mart into trouble. It will be whether Bob ever sold pot at the Wal-Mart where he just happened to work, and whether Wal-Mart can be construed to have “maintained a public nuisance” or been negligent in some way. Any aggressive attorney (no offense, guys) could probably make some headway with this in a civil suit, which is now one of the principle ways of recovering damages from a deep-pockets corporation. I read about it happening 10 times a day.

Tort law and coporate liability has changed a lot over the last 50 years to favor the litigant more and more. Also, it takes very little these days to "pierce the corporate veil" and make corporate officers personally liable for damages. Not to mention that steroids are now the political and fashionable topic of loathing, the flavor of the month of seediness and the unscrupulous. Does everyone reading this want to be the lightning rod for the first test case in front of a jury filled with prejudice against 'roid heads? Can any of you afford it?

As far as the DEA goes, they don't have to follow the rules to put everyone here out of business permanently. Yes, they probably are focusing on big meth and heroin dealers/makers. But suppose that changes soon so that the public percieves 'roids as the next "Menace To Our Youth", inspiring Congress to enact some knee-jerk, constituent-pleasing legislation? If the DEA gets a congressional sanction for this reason, watch out. Opinion is already leaning that way.

As far as the 1st ammendment goes, that is a luxury for corporations with money and the media/press, and none of you are members of either group. Could your mag afford a legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court? That is where issues of free speech are usually decided.

I may be overreacting, it is true. But why risk it? If I am proved wrong about this, I will be so happy. You have a real nice thing going here, and I would like to see it hang around for a long while. I just think you need to be a little more cautious.